Tom Cruise is under fire again.

After HBO aired the documentary Going Clear: Scientology and the Prison of Belief, it stirred up new interests in Tom’s “religion” of choice. I watched the film, and found it pretty OK. Sadly, because I’ve always been interested in cults and already had my moment in the sun with Scientology (<—hey, click that), nothing new was whispered into my ears. But it was still worth a couple hours of my time.

With a light shining bright on Scientology, people are saying Tom Cruise and John Travolta, the two most popular practitioners, should speak out against abuses in the church. Journalists and laymen alike are holding the actors accountable for atrocities taken by church leaders while they remain silent.

Really?

On October 3rd, 1992, I was watching Saturday Night Live; that night, Sinead O’Connor sang the song War. At the end of her performance, she shredded a picture of Pope John Paul the Pedophile Protector, making a statement against Vatican abuses against children.

Was she lauded for her efforts in bringing dark secrets to the forefront of the American consciousness? Was she given credit for standing up for children?

No.

People didn’t use the moment to wake up, they buried their heads even further in the sand and vilified Sinead. In fact, the very next week host Joe Pesci announced that had she done that when he was there, he would have smacked her.

Right, good call. Compounding violence against children with violence against the woman standing up for them. Bravo Joe. And bravo silent society.

So, if the world can bury its head in the collective sand when Sinead makes a statement that was factually accurate–Pope John the Polish absolutely protected pedophile priests (and his successor, Pope Benedict the Nazi… do I really need to discuss all he did?)–why are Tom Cruise and John Travolta being called out?

Because Christianity is popular, and Scientology is not.

Everyone believes the nonsense they believe. That’s all there is to it.

There is an old interview of Tom, one that makes him look completely insane while espousing his love of Scientology. Even I, a fan of his, find it difficult to watch. But, is he any more insane than Michelle Bachman, Sarah Palin, Rick Santorum, or Pat Robertson? They all have crazy in their eyes, hearts, and head. To many, their particular brand of insane is acceptable, because they’re crazy for Jesus.

Since a virgin birth is somehow more believable than alien overlords, Cruise/Travolta are looked upon as nuts, while Palin/Santorum are forgiven. I get, but do not appreciate the disparity of judgment. At least Cruise adds something of value to society. Did you see Jack Reacher, The Edge of Tomorrow, or Oblivion? They were all fucking fantastic. Name something beneficial to humanity Palin/Robertson/Bachmann or Robertson has done. You can’t.

When it comes to religion, the difference between accepted and rejected is time.

While Christianity can be traced to roots in Egyptian folklore and has no real historical backing, it’s still far enough in the past believers can point out that there’s no video footage to prove their nonsense wrong.

Scientology, however, can absolutely be proven a lie founded by a charlatan. The documentation is overwhelming, and anyone turning a blind eye to it is doing so willfully.

Big whoop.

Mormonism is as new and far-fetched as Scientology, and can be traced to the core of it’s foundation in lies. But, but for the most part Mormons are not vilified like Scientologists. It’s not fair, but them’s the breaks.

Personally, I don’t think it’s fair to champion one cult as being better than another, so for the love of fuck please stop trying.

Besides, if anyone is dumb enough to sign a billion-year work contract to Scientology? I actually want to thank Scientology for getting that person out and away from society. I don’t think that person was going to cure cancer or be beneficial to the whole anyway.

Hey, click this button and subscribe.

Comedian Nathan Timmel

Pin It on Pinterest

Shares